christology in the making worshiping ofwith angels in colossians.pdf

THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE

GRAECO-ROMAN WORLD

ARTICLES IN HONOR OF

ABE MALHERBE

MARIUS NEL, JAN G. VAN DER WATT

& FIKA J. VAN RENSBURG (EDITORS)

2014

2

Copyright © by Editors and Authors

3

Theology in Africa edited by

Prof. Dr. Jan van der Watt Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religion

Radboud University, Nijmegen

Volume 4

5

CONTENTS

PREFACE 9

ABBREVIATIONS 11

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS 13

ON HOSPITALITY IN 3 JOHN: AN EVALUATION OF THE

RESPONSE OF MALINA TO MALHERBE

Jan Van Der Watt 15

CROSSING BOUNDARIES IN NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES:

ABRAHAM J. MALHERBE AND EUROPEAN SCHOLARSHIP

Cilliers Breytenbach 35

ABOMINABLE SYMBOLIC ANIMAL IMAGERY AS

APOCALYPTIC ENEMIES OF GOD ACCORDING TO

REVELATION 16:13-14

Jan A. du Rand 45

‘CUSTOMS THAT ARE NOT LAWFUL’: THE SOCIAL

APOLOGY OF LUKE-ACTS

Gregory E. Sterling 65

FAITH AS AN EXCEPTIONAL RELIGIOUS STATE OF

CONSCIOUSNESS: A PRAGMATIC-LINGUISTIC READING OF

ROMANS 12

Andries van Aarde 87

6

REVISITING HAPAX LEGOMENA IN AD HEBRAEOS – WITH

SPECIAL REFERENCE TO HEBREWS 4:12–13

Gert J. Steyn 117

CHRISTOLOGY IN THE MAKING: THE PROBLEM OF

WORSHIPPING AND HONOURING ANGELS IN COLOSSIANS

Jacobus (Kobus) Kok 145

PATROCINIUM AND EUERGETISM: SIMILAR OR DIFFERENT

RECIPROCAL RELATIONSHIPS? EAVESDROPPING ON THE

CURRENT DEBATE AMONGST BIBLICAL SCHOLARS

Stephan Joubert 171

DISCERNING EMPIRE IN BIBLICAL STUDIES: TOOLS OF THE

TRADE?

Jeremy Punt 197

KEEPING THE FAITH - ABE MALHERBE'S CONTRIBUTION

TO INTEGRATING THEOLOGY AND MINISTRY

Johannes Wessels 226

CHRISTIAN DISPUTES: SUGGESTING A WAY FORWARD. A

STUDY IN THE APPLICATION OF ROMANS 14:1-15:13

Wim C. Vergeer 234

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SLAVE-OWNER AND SLAVE: A

SOCIO-JURISTIC READING OF PHILEMON

Hendrik Goede 264

THE DIFFICULT SITUATION IN 1 THESSALONIANS

Jaco Putter 280

7

FUNCTION OF MARK 13 IN THE EARLY CHURCH

Marius Nel 294

INDEX OF AUTHORS 314

9

PREFACE

Abraham Johannes Malherbe, or Abe as everyone knew him, was

born on 15 May 1930 in Capitol Park, Pretoria in South Africa. He

obtained his first degree in Greek from the Abilene Christian Univer-

sity in the USA, the training centre of the Churches of Christ. He

continued his studies at Harvard in Boston where he received the

S.T.B. degree in 1957. His talent was recognised and he could enroll

for his doctorate (Th.D.) under Prof. Arthur Darby Nock, a well-

known professor at the time. He completed his doctorate in 1963

under the supervision of Prof. Helmut Koester as Prof. Nock had

passed away. Nock was the great academic influence in Abe’s life.

Whenever he spoke of his academic life, Nock’s name regularly fea-

tured. Nock instilled in Abe a love for text, thoroughness and a pur-

suit of excellence – traits that were to become his great academic

characteristics.

In the same year as completing his doctorate at Harvard, he was

appointed as associate professor in New Testament and early Christi-

anity at the Abilene Christian University to lecture on the New Tes-

tament, as well as the Greek philosophical and religious background

of the New Testament. This suited Abe down to the ground and he

was one of the first of his generation to unlock the social dynamics of

the Graeco-Roman ancient texts for New Testament research. Interest

in the New Testament’s social framework, which began to emerge

strongly during the latter part of the previous century and which still

features prominently in this field of study, largely had its origins in

Abe’s study in Abilene. He acquired knowledge about the ancient

social world and the accompanying resources – a knowledge that was

unequalled among New Testament scholars of his time. It was for this

very reason that he could play such a leading role in the development

of a social understanding of New Testament texts.

Whilst at Abilene he also applied himself to establishing an ethos

of high academic standards, which yielded many results for the insti-

tution in years to come. Eventually ten outstanding academics from

the ranks of the Churches of Christ (including John Fitzgerald, Carl

Holladay and Michael White) undertook their doctor’s degrees at

Yale under his supervision.

10

Abe lectured at the Abilene Christian University until 1969 and he

excelled at it. In 1967 Abilene honored him with the Trustees’ Out-

standing Teacher of the Year award. However, he spread his wings

further. During this time, he was also a visiting lecturer at Harvard

University (1967−1968) and he started the Living Word Commentary

Series as its first editor. In 1969 he left Abilene and relocated to

Dartmouth where he caught the attention of the influential Nils Dahl

of Yale. The following year his book, The structure of Athenagoras

(North Holland), was published. As a result, he was appointed as

lecturer at Yale in 1970. Since 1981 he held the prestigious Bucking-

ham professorship at the Yale School of Divinity − a position he held

until his retirement in 1994.

He retired in 1994 after a rewarding career at Yale where he had

left his mark. He took up leadership positions, for example that of

Deputy Dean of Student Affairs − a position he thoroughly enjoyed.

He was also involved in the development of libraries at Yale, as well

as at Abilene − one of his passions.

For Abe his faith remained central in his life, right to the end. He

had the ability to balance the possible tension between his faith and

his academic activity. His whole life he was intensely involved in

church activities − whether it was in the form of preaching, adult

training, by helping out with catering or by making people feel at

home. Where he was needed and where he could make a contribution

is where he could be found. He did research and published until his

death on 28 September 2012 at the age of 82.

On 1 August 2013, North-West University in Potchefstroom,

South Africa hosted an Abe Malherbe Memorial Seminar under the

chairmanship of proff. Fika J. van Rensburg, Dean of the Faculty of

Theology, and Jan G. van der Watt, of Radboud University and asso-

ciated with North-West University.

These articles in honor of prof. Abe Malherbe is the product of the

Seminar with South African and international scholars honoring the

memory of a great New Testament scholar working in the USA and

influencing especially the country of his birth.

Jan G. van der Watt

11

ABBREVIATIONS

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary

ANRW Aufstieg und Niergang der römischen Welt, Tempo-

rini, H. & Haase, W. (eds.)

BASOR Bulletin of the American School of Oriental Re-

search

BJRL Bulletin of the John Rylands Library

BTB Biblical Theology Bulletin

CBQ Catholic Biblical Quarterly

HTR Harvard Theological Review

HvTSt Hervormde Teologiese Studies

JAAR Journal of the American Academy of Religion

JBL Journal of Biblical Literature

JECS Journal of Early Christian Studies

JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament

NGTT Nederduitse Gereformeerde Teologiese Tydskrif

NTS New Testament Studies

RBL Review of Biblical Literature

ResQ Restoration Quarterly

SHE Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae

SJT Scottish Journal of Theology

StTh Studia Theologica

ThLZ Theologische Literaturzeitung

TynBul Tyndale Bulletin

ZNW Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft

ZThK Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche

13

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Cilliers Breytenbach

Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany; University of Stellen-

bosch, South Africa [email protected]

Jan A. du Rand

North-West University, South Africa [email protected]

Hendrik Goede


Stephan Joubert


Jacobus (Kobus) Kok

University of Pretoria, South Africa [email protected]

Marius Nel


Jeremy Punt

University of Stellenbosch, South Africa [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







14

Jaco Putter


Gregory E. Sterling

Yale Divinity School, USA [email protected]

Gert J. Steyn


Andries van Aarde


Jan van der Watt

Radboud University, Netherlands; North-West University, South

Africa [email protected]

Wim C. Vergeer


Johannes Wessels









145

CHRISTOLOGY IN THE MAKING: THE PROBLEM OF

WORSHIPPING AND HONOURING ANGELS

IN COLOSSIANS1

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA, SOUTH AFRICA

Introduction Abraham Malherbe was a significant academic with an extraordinary

communicative ability. With his wisdom, wit and charm, he was so

often able to convey meaningful truths about life and people. He had a

unique way of putting thoughts in such a way that it “stuck” with a

person. He was someone who could make a true impression on a per-

son to such an extent that one would find oneself playing the scene

over and over in one’s mind. It was next to a river in Skukuza in the

Kruger national park in South Africa, against the background of the

setting sun in September 2011, that Abraham Malherbe made a re-

mark that impacted me in ways I never would have imagined.2 In his

wise, sage-like voice, he said to me: ‘We are part of all those we have

met along the way’. These words are true on many levels. In us, we

carry many voices and perspectives of those we have met and those

who have influenced us, as well as those of whom we are a part – like

our family, our culture, our religion, etc. This has implications for the

1 This article is a translation and slightly updated version of an article that originally

appeared as Kok, 2010. 2 My discussions with Prof Malherbe eventually led me to discover and use Dialogical

Self Theory as a heuristic tool in New Testament Studies. Prof. Frans Wijsen (Rad-

boud University) was the first to introduce me to DST, which is a psychological theo-

ry that was developed by Hubert Hermans, also at the University of Nijmegen. I am

also indebted to Prof. Hermans for insights which have consequently shaped my

thinking about the polyphonic nature of identity.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

146

way we think about early Christians as well. Often we think of the

early Christians/Christ-followers3 in a way that presuppose that when

they came to conversion, they forgot everything of their past and they

simply moved over from one existence to another, rejecting every-

thing that was part of their former existence (cf. 1 Thess. 1:9). But if

Malherbe is correct, we will never completely ‘break’ with the narra-

tives of or past. They are a part of us, negative or positive. We will

always be in some dialogue with our past and our multi-dimensional

polyphonic identities.4 Even after conversion, our lives often reveal

the elements of our past. That might also have been the case in the

lives of early Christians. For Malherbe, Paul was a complex polyphon-

ic character. On another occasion, Malherbe mentioned that Paulus

Christianus was just as much Paulus Hellenisticus. To this we could

add that Paul was just as much Paulus Iudaicus. Within Paul, there

might have been many ‘voices’ and perhaps ‘conflicting selves’. The

same was probably true for early Christians. Identity is not created in

a flash instance. Identity is constructed over time. In Colossians we

find elements of conflicting identities on the part of the believers. In

the Letter to the Colossians the author wants to steer the believers in a

particular direction and shape their identity and self-understanding in

a particular manner. In order to do so, Christ is presented as head over

everything that was created. This implies that Christ must take a pri-

mary promoter position in the identity of a Christ-follower. When this

is not the case, identity is distorted, and believers are drawn away

from their true identity.

Purpose of the essay In this article the Colossian heresy will be discussed. This is, however,

a very troublesome epistle to use in any assessment of a Pauline

3 The term ‘Christian’ was only coined decades after the death of Jesus (cf. Acts

11:26). We should in other words not think of the first Christ-followers as being

‘Christian’ as if ‘Christianity’ existed as a self-contained religion at that time. 4 The term ‘polyphonic identities’ refers to the multifaceted nature of the self which is

made up of several different I-positions. See the latest research on Dialogical Self

theory (Hermans & Gieser, 2012) and its implication for New Testament Studies

(Kok, 2014).

CHRISTOLOGY IN THE MAKING: THE PROBLEM OF WORSHIPPING AND HONOURING ANGELS IN COLOSSIANS

147

theme, due to the uncertainty of who the author of Colossians could

have been, as well as the unclear nature of the heresy in question.5

The majority of scholars are of the opinion (cf. Col. 2:18) that the

false teachers in the congregation encouraged the worshipping of an-

gels.6 As it will become clear, this is the case when this verse is read

in the objective genitive case. This investigative discussion will help

us to discern what function angels played in certain religious circles in

the early church (e.g., as mediators of revelation etc.). It will also be

investigated in which way the ἀγγέλων in 2:18 are connected with the

στοιχείων τοῦ κόσμου in 2:20. In Colossians, Paul presents Jesus as

the Crucified, Cosmic Christ (cf. 1:15-20) that will help us to under-

stand the early Christian reaction towards such heresy as the one we

find in Colossae and also to investigate the relationship between the

Angelology and the Christology.7

Presuppositions The paradigm or lens through which the author and interpreter ap-

proach the text8 is inter alia formed by the view they have of who the

possible writer and audience of the Letter to the Colossians were.

Thus, in order for us to interpret the specific text, we first have to dis-

cuss the background against which to understand the text that repre-

sents the presuppositions of the author of this article. I will firstly con-

sider the socio-cultural background, its authorship and possible read-

ers will be sketched and then the text under investigation will be posi-

5 See Thompson (2005:2-5) who discusses the issue of uncertainty regarding the

author of the Letter, but who argues that ‘distinctive vocabulary cannot rule defini-

tively against Pauline authorship…’. The reason is that the unique situation or con-

texts to a large degree determines the nature of the words being used. Cf. also the

discussion of Carr (1981:47). The argument that Colossians cannot be Pauline be-

cause of its lack of strong polemical language typical of the authentic Pauline material

(cf. Gal. 3:1-5; 1 Cor. 4:8; 2 Cor. 6:11) is also not convincing. The unique context and

Paul’s relationship with the particular audience determines the nature of the Letter. 6 See the discussion of Col. 2:18 below where those for and against will be mentioned. 7 According to Lohse (1986:11) the Christology is the point of central significance in

Colossians. 8 See Osborne (2008:17-50) for a discussion on literary theory and Biblical interpreta-

tion.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

148

tioned within the macro and micro context of Colossians as a whole

after which the detail exegesis will take place.

Authorship and place of writing With regard to authorship,9 those who tend to think of it as an authen-

tic Pauline Letter,10 argue that this is evident when one looks at Paul-

ine theological parallels,11 some stylistic idiosyncrasies12 of Paul as

well as the close relationship with Philemon13 (and Ephesians) (cf.

Kümmel, 1975:343; Guthrie, 1976:554; Schweizer, 1982:15).14 Lohse

9 See Barclay (1997:35). 10 I agree with the philosopher Karl Popper (1994) that a theory should be considered

scientific if and only if it is falsifiable and better theories arrive that survive the evolu-

tionary process of academic research and the process of refutation. The researcher

should thus always be open for better/alternative answers to problems, with the pre-

supposition that what we assume at a given moment might change according to new

knowledge. 11 Cf. the discussion of Lohse (1986:180-183). 12 There are good arguments (cf. Kümmel, 1975:341) in favour of Pauline authorship

when certain idiosyncrasies of Paul are taken in consideration: cf. the pleonastic καὶ

after Διὰ τοῦτο (1:9) which in the NT is only found in Paul (cf. Rom. 13:6; 9:24; Eph.

1:15 in dependence on Col. 1:9); ἐν μέρει (with regard to) in Col. 2:16 occurs only in

2 Cor. 3:10; 9:3 etc. See also the ἐν Χριστῷ (1:28; cf. 3:11) formula that is typical

Pauline (see Rom. 16:3, 6, 9, 10, etc.) (Kümmel, 1975:345). 13 See Guthrie (1976:554) for a discussion on the strongest arguments in support of

authenticity where he argues in favour of the inseparable connection with the undis-

puted Pauline Letter Philemon. He also remarks that it formed part of the Pauline

Corpus as far back as it could be traced, and that authorship was not disputed until the

nineteenth century. 14 Some of the arguments against Pauline authorship rests on the argument that here

we have rather un-Pauline thoughts, for instance the ‘cosmic character of the Chris-

tology’ that are transformed along ecclesiological lines (cf. the hymn in 1:15-20). I

agree with Kümmel (1975:343) that this could simply be seen as thoughts which are

developed ‘in antithesis to the teachings of the false teachers, [in which) the author

assigns to Christ the cosmos-encompassing role of mediator of creation and victor…’

(cf. 1:15-17, 20a; 2:10, 15). However, these arguments alone are not strong enough to

argue in favour of Deutero-Pauline authorship. In Pauline thought the death and resur-

rection of Christ is viewed as the victorious event over cosmic powers. The elements

of this ‘cosmic Christology’ has its antecedents in the authentic Pauline letters, e.g. 1

Cor. 2:8; 8:6; 2 Cor. 4:4; Gal. 4:3, 9; Phil. 2:10. With regards to the ‘head of the body,

the church’ metaphor (Col. 1:18; 2:19), it fits within the framework of the Pauline

ecclesiology as being the σώμα of Christ (cf. Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12, 14; see Col.


149

(1986:180-183) who convincingly argues against15 Pauline authorship

(cf. also Van Eck, 2008),16 do acknowledge that the unknown author

of Colossians, must have been thoroughly acquainted with the princi-

ple themes of Pauline theology and that he was no doubt very well

versed in the epistles of Paul and therefore the Letter certainly seems

Pauline in character.17 As Shillington (2008:217-221) on the other

hand argues, it also seems that Colossians represents a more devel-

oped theology than that of the seven undisputed Pauline letters with

specific reference to the Christology, eschatology (realized), ecclesi-

3:15). Against those who argue that besides the hapax legomena in Col. and the 36

un-Pauline words that prove the un-Pauline nature of Col., it could be argued that Paul

simply used ‘catchwords’ of the φιλοσοφία (2:8) of the false teachers, which becomes

apparent when one notices the fact that many of these words occur in the hymn, etc.

(1:10-20; 2:16-23) which could have been taken over for the polemical aim of the

letter (see O'Brien, 1982:xlii-xliv). Therefore there is no reason to doubt Pauline

authorship on the basis of language and style (O'Brien, 1982:xliv; Kümmel,

1975:342). 15 See Guthrie (1976:344). Some who argue against Pauline authorship argue that in

Col. 1:5, 23 and 27 we find a realized eschatology and that hope developed into an

otherworldly quality of hope, typical to later developments in theology, and that none

of the eschatological Pauline ideas like parousia, resurrection of the dead, judgement

of the world etc. are present in Col. Kümmel (1975:344) argues that in Rom. 8:24

elpis has a quality of hopefulness too. 16 After Mayerhoff (1838) who disputed Pauline authorship, others like Baur (Tübing-

en School) (see Kümmel, 1975:340; Guthrie, 1976:551) followed who traced the letter

to Gnostic circles of at least the second century. Holtzmann (1872) went so far as to

argue that the original letter was edited by the author of Ephesians for anti-Gnostic

ends. Kümmel (1975:342) correctly points to the fact that if it is assumed that the

false teachers of Colossians were Gnostics, Pauline authorship will be unlikely, due to

the fact that it is assumed that gnosis was first encountered in the form of the Chris-

tian gnosis of the second century. If such Gnostic false teachings are combated in

Colossians, it would mean that it was written well after the death of Paul. Lohse

(1986) also do not support Pauline authorship. Kümmel (1975:340-346) convincingly

argues in favour of the Pauline nature of Colossians. 17 Schweizer (1982:15) notes: ‘[C]olossians has every appearance of being a genuine

Pauline epistle’. He also discusses the structural correspondence between Colossians

and Romans. Later on he moves to the stylistic parts and conclude that it was written

by an author, ‘who, although following Paul completely in vocabulary and theological

concepts, differs from him altogether in his mode of argument. The letter can neither

have been written nor dictated by Paul’ (Schweizer, 1982:18-19).

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

150

ology and the household ethics. He does however fail to prove why

certain stylistic idiosyncrasies of Paul appear in the text.18

Those scholars who argue in favour of Pauline authorship19 argue

that Paul might have written the Letter in prison20 (cf. 4:3,10) from

either Rome or Ephesus (even Caesarea).21 Accordingly, it is supposed

that the events referring to the problematic worshipping of angels22 in

Colossians 2:18 historically occurred somewhere between 52 and 6023

CE24 in the midst of the Christ-followers25 of Colossae26 in Asia Minor

18 I suppose that it might be possible that it could have been students of Paul, who

were well versed in Pauline theology, but this stays educated guessing, and the empir-

ical grounds still fail short. With regards to the so-called more developed Christology,

I am of the opinion (cf. also Kümmel, 1975:343cf. also footnote above) that the par-

ticular situation of the false teacher's philosophy and the possibility that he used

catchwords of their philosophy could solve this problem. It should also be noted that

there did not necessarily exist a homogenous theological development in every part of

the world at that time. A situational context could have influenced another theological

response. 19 In the history of research (cf. Percy, 1946:5ff) it is well-known that the Pauline

authorship is disputed by many, e.g. Mayerhoff (1838) who was one of the first to

argue in favour of a dependence of Colossians on Ephesians and several un-Pauline

ideas, etc. 20 Paul is clearly in prison as we see in 4:3, 10, but where he is imprisoned is not

explicitly stated (cf. Lohse, 1986:4). Epaphras is with him in prison (Col. 4:7f, 12f;

Phil. 2:3) and Tychicus delivered the Letter (4:7) together with Onesimus (2:9) who

was one of the Colossians. 21 For a detailed discussion of the possible place of Paul's imprisonment, see O'Brien

(1982:xlix-liv). Personally I agree with O'Brien (1982:liv) that it was either in Rome

or in Ephesus. If in Rome, then it had to be early in Paul's (first) Roman imprisonment

(60-61 CE), and if it was in Ephesus it must have been around 54-57 or 52-55 CE. 22 This was also the occasion for the writing of the Letter by Paul, because the Chris-

tians were exposed to false teachers. Paul was not the founder of the church in Colos-

sae, but his mitarbeiter Epaphras (1:7) planted the church (4:13; 1:7; 4:12). From 1:7

we can infer that Epaphras' ministry in Colossae was commissioned by Paul himself

and therefore Paul could argue that these communities belonged to his missionary

territory and thus is also his responsibility (cf. Paul's journey through Phrygia in Acts

16:8; 18:23). 23 Schweizer (1982:19) rightly points to the fact that, ‘Against post-Pauline authorship

it must first be noted that Colossae, after AD 61, seems to have been destroyed’.

Colossae vanishes from our literary sources after 60 CE when Laodicea was destroyed

by an earthquake (see Tacitus, Annals 14.27). 24 The date projected is important for several reasons, inter alia with regards to the

history of the development of Pauline theology regarding issues like ecclesiology,


151

(cf. Kümmel, 1975:348). However, if Paul was not the author, a much

later date will obviously have to be projected. The dating has im-

portant implications, since if it was written long after Paul’s death, it

will have implications for the way one constructs the relationship be-

tween the emerging Christian movement and Judaism for instance.

This matter is of course a topic of major debate for those who work on

the ‘parting of the ways’, or the ‘ways that never parted’. Within this

Letter we have different dialogical discourses in which Hellenistic and

Jewish elements are in some form of interaction or syncretistic ‘fu-

sion’ some would say. Thus, the matter of authorship and dating has

significant implications on many levels. However, whether one ac-

cepts it as Pauline or not, most scholars would agree that we have here

a deep connection to Paul and his theology. Readers of the Letter to

the Colossians need to be sensitive to the fact that early Christians

connected this Letter to Paul and/or the Pauline tradition with the re-

sult that the Letter was taken up into the Christian canon. At least for

the early Christians, the Letter had authority, and was closely connect-

ed to Paul.

The occasion for writing the Letter In the opening section of the Letter the author praises God for the

faithfulness (1:2,4 - πίστιν) of the community and the abundant love

eschatology and Christology as well as the relationship between Jews and non-Jews.

In the later developments of the Pauline theology we will most probably find a more

established ecclesiology, a realized eschatology, and a more rigidly formulated apos-

tolic office, etc. (see Kümmel, 1975:340-345). 25 The community most probably, according to 1:21, 27; 2:13 consisted predominantly

of Gentile Christians (see Lohse, 1986:2). 26 Colossae was discovered in 1835 and is situated on the southern bank of the river

Lycus. The city was well-known for its meanders and fertile valley in which figs,

olives and crops were produced in abundance. Currently the former site of Colossae is

deserted and lies close to the modern town Honaz which is about five kilometres away

(see O' Brien, 1982:xxvi). It is situated on the early main road from Ephesus and

Sardis to the Euphrates. Many a soldier marched along this particular road. Colossae

also had other commercial significance due to its wool industry. In the centuries be-

fore Paul's time it was seen as a very large city (cf. Herodotus [fifth century BCE] in

History 7.30.1; but in Paul's time Colossae lost it importance and Strabo speaks of it

as being a ‘small town’ (Strabo in Geography 12.8.13).

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

152

(1:4 - ἀγάπην) and hope (1:5- ἐλπίδα) they have. Paul thus writes this

Letter, not because the congregation's life and conduct offer a cause

for reprimand, but because he is deeply worried that the community

may be led astray by false teachers (Lohse, 1986:2-3). Therefore he

urgently writes the Letter in order to warn and admonish them con-

cerning the correct teaching and to guide them in a certain direction.

Although Epaphras planted the church (1:7), it still fell under Paul's

missionary field of responsibility due to the fact that the former was a

Mitarbeiter of Paul. It most probably was Epaphras,27 as the leader of

the church, who visited Paul in prison (cf. Phil. 23) in order to seek

advice from Paul as to the way in which to deal with the problem of

the false teaching which had arisen in their midst. Paul felt the need to

rebut the error that lay at the heart of this strange aberration of the

apostolic kerygma (O'Brien 1982:xxx).

The Colossian Heresy – The worshiping of/with angels

in 2:18? Guthrie (1976:546) rightly points to the fact that it is no easy endeavor

to reconstruct the precise tenets of a heresy in the context where lim-

ited information is available like the situation in Colossians where we

only have indirect allusions to the particular heresy. Some scholars

like Hooker (1973:315-331) deny that there was a Colossian heresy.28

She claims that it is clear from 1:3-8 that Paul is praising the commu-

nity for their faith and stability29 and that it does in no way compare

for example with the strong indignation found in Galatians against

false teaching (see Kümmel, 1975:338). At the end of the Letter the

author even states that the Letter should be taken to Laodicea to be

read to the community of believers there (4:16), and that the Letter

sent to the Laodiceans should be read in Colossae. There is, however,

27 Epaphras might have been converted to Christianity when Paul was in Ephesus (cf.

Acts 19:10) (see Guthrie, 1976:545). 28 There currently does not exist a consensus in the academic world concerning the

nature of the Colossian heresy (see Lohse, 1986:127-131). 29 Kümmel (1975:338) argues that Paul is grateful for the Colossians' fidelity to faith

in Christ (1:3ff; 2:5) but seeks to the perfecting and strengthening of their Christian

confession (1:9ff; 2:6ff).


153

no reference to the activity of the false teachers in Laodicea, and

therefore the Colossian Letter would not serve the role of combating

false teaching, but rather of giving general perspectives. I agree with

O'Brien (1982:xxxi) that Hooker's thesis does not take into considera-

tion the strong language in 2:8-23 (cf. also φιλοσοφία in 2:8) with

regard to the specific ascetic injunctions such as those in 2:16 - Μὴ

οὖν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω ἐν βρώσει καὶ ἐν πόσει ἢ ἐν μέρει ἑορτῆς ἢ

νεομηνίας ἢ σαββάτων (cf. do not touch, do not taste…). These unu-

sual phrases could according to O'Brien (1982:xxxii) be interpreted as

slogans or catchwords (also Lohse, 1986:127) of the opponents’

φιλοσοφία (cf. 2:8) that the author of Colossians is quoting in his at-

tack on their false teaching.30 Needless to say, the author of the Letter

regarded the heresy as a definite danger to the Church, something that

needed urgent attention. It seems that the heresy was in some way

detracting believers from the Person of Christ (Guthrie, 1976:546) and

as we will later see, their identity in Christ.

Below, the important central verse in Colossians (2:18), with re-

gards to the worship of/with angels will be discussed.

Exegesis of Colossians 2:18 The verse under investigation follows the introductory part of Colos-

sians (1:1-2:5) and fits into the polemical statement of the second sec-

tion that begins in 2:6 and ends in 2:23 in which the dangers of the

false teachers to the community are discussed. Following the polemic

part, the paraenesis (3:1-4:6) and conclusion (4:7-18) of the Letter

follows (Kümmel, 1975:336; cf. also Guthrie, 1976:560). Colossians

2:18 is imbedded in the context of 2:16-23 in which the end of Regu-

lations (Lohse, 1986:114) or Legalism (O'Brien, 1982:135) is dis-

cussed by the author of the Letter. This section follows upon the result

of ‘God's work in Christ and the Colossians' union with him in his

death, burial and resurrection, springs out of (οῦν̓, “therefore”) what

30 For example, as O'Brien (1982:xxxii) points out: 2:9 (cf. 1:19), ‘all the fullness’

(πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα); 2:18 ‘delighting in humility and the worship of angels’ (θέλων ἐν

ταπεινοφροσύνῃ καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων); 2:18 ‘[things] which he has seen upon

entering’ (ἃ ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων); 2:21 ‘Don’t handle, don’t taste, don’t even touch’

(μὴ ἅψῃ, μηδὲ λεύσῃ, μηδὲ θίλῃς); 2:23 ‘voluntary worship’ (ἐθελοθρησκίᾳ), ‘humili-

ty’ (ταπεινοφροσύνῃ), and ‘severe treatment of the body’ (ἀφειδίᾳ σώματος).

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

154

has preceded…’ (O'Brien, 1982:135-136). In 2:8 the community is

warned against the false ‘philosophy’ and in the following paragraphs

it is developed further. Structurally, 2:18 - μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς

καταβραβευέτω (‘Let no one condemn you...’) is connected to 2:16 -

μὴ οῦ̓ν τις ὑμᾶς κρινέτω (2:16 - ‘Therefore do not let anyone pass

judgment upon you’). In the prohibition of 2:16, five areas are cov-

ered:31

ἐν βρὠσει καὶ ἐν πόσει,

‘with regard to food or drink’

ἤ ἐν μἐρει ἑορτῆς ἤ νεομηνίας ἤ σαββάτων

‘or concerning a religious festival, a new moon cel-

ebration or a Sabbath day’

The dietary prohibitions and holy times are most likely Jewish in

character. This becomes clear when a comparison is made with the

LXX of Hosea 2:13 and Ezekiel 45:17 etc. where ἑορτῆς, νεομηνίας

and σαββάτων are terms which often occur in the Old Testament in

this combination and represents special days dedicated to God (Lohse,

1986:115). The difference between the use of the terms in Colossians

and the use of it in the Old Testament is that here it is not based on the

Torah and the relationship between God and his people, but for the

sake of placating the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου, who direct the course of

the stars and have an effect on the wellbeing and fate of the communi-

ty (O'Brien, 1982:xxxiii; Lohse, 1986:115-116). The false teachers

seem to claim that since the angelic powers have an influence on the

order of the cosmos, their sacred regulations (time, diet, etc.) should

be observed and the regulations followed (Lohse, 1986:116) in order

to mollify them.32

Carr (1981:1) refers to the influential books of Dibelius (1909) and

Everling (1888) in which both authors attempted to establish that

within the context in which Paul worked, the world was dominated by

hostile supernatural forces and that this was the context that influ-

31 O'Brien (1982). 32 Lohse (1986:1160 fn. 14) refers to Elchasai, who had directed his followers to

carefully keep the Sabbath, and linked it to the course of the stars. (See Hippolytus,

Refut. 9, 16, 2f).


155

enced the author and the original recipient’s thinking on man's exist-

ence and the work of Christ. In Colossians 2:18, which is connected to

2:16 with reference to the false teachers' philosophy, we read the fol-

lowing thoughts of Paul:33

μηδεὶς ὑμᾶς καταβραβευέτω (Let no one condemn you),

o θέλων (delighting)

ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ (in humility)

καὶ θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων, (and the wor-

ship of angels34),

o ἃ (which)35ἑόρακεν ἐμβατεύων (he has seen upon

entering)

o εἰκῇ φυσιούμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ νοὸς τῆς σαρκὸς αὐτοῦ

(He is puffed up with idle notions from his unspiritual

mind)

When translations of Colossians 2:18 are compared, we clearly see

that there are different possibilities of interpreting the phrase,

θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων (worshipping of angels).

Bible Translation

German Luther Bible Geistlichkeit der Engel

Afrikaanse Ou Vertaling verering van die engele

Afrikaanse Nuwe Vertaling aanbidding van engele

Die Boodskap engele aanbid

King James Version worshipping of angels

New American Standard Bible worship of the angels

Figure 1: Translation of θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων

In most modern translations, we find that the θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων is

in most cases taken as an objective genitive; in other words, it is un-

derstood in the sense that the heretics as subjects are worshipping the

33 The translation employed here was taken from O'Brien (1982:135) and revised in

some places. 34 The Greek τῶν ἀγγέλων is in the genitive plural. 35 According to O'Brien (1982:135), ‘The reading ἅ (“which”) is strongly supported

by P46 and good representatives of the Alexandrian and Western types of text (א* A B

D* etc)’.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

156

angels as objects. But, this is not the only way to interpret the phrase.

It could also be interpreted as a subjective genitive; in other words, the

focus is not on the worship of the angels by men, but men experienc-

ing (or taking part in) the angels as they (the angels) worship God (cp.

e.g., Francis, 1963).36 Accordingly, the question is whether the false

teachers were in actuality partaking in the worshiping ‘of’ (objective

genitive) angels, or worshiping ‘with’ (subjective genitive) angels?

Excursus: Angels in the Old and New Testaments37 Angels in the Old Testament

1. In the Old Testament there are at least two contrasting views of angels

(drawing on Bietenhard, 1975:101-102):

a) Heavenly beings as members of Yahweh's court who praise and serve

him (cf. Job 2:6; Is. 6:2, etc.), historically associated with the Canaanite back-

ground. During these times Yahweh was the sole creator God, and there exist-

ed no angel cult in Israel at that time. In post-exilic times we find other heav-

enly beings called ‘holy ones’, ‘strong ones’, ‘sons of God’, etc. They are pre-

sented as having witnessed creation (Job 38:7) and as being mediators of

God’s revelation (Zech. 1:9, 11ff; 2:2-5, 6-9; Ezek. 40:3). There were also an-

gels of war (Gen. 32:1; Jos. 5:13; Ps. 78:49) and destruction (Ex. 12:23). After

the exile we find clear evidence that the belief in angels increased due to Is-

rael's contact with other religions and startling questions about Yahweh's tran-

scendence and perceived absence that demanded response (Carr, 1981:36).

Angels start to appear as intermediate beings with personal names, archangels,

etc., and millions surround God's throne (cf. Dan. 4:13, 17; 7:10; 8:16). The

religion of Babylon was associated with the planets and stars, and this is later

connected to Jewish thinking where angels are connected with the stars (Carr,

1981:36).

b) The Angel of Yahweh who is a heavenly being given a particular task by

Yahweh and appears in contexts where people are in need of help. The Angel

of Yahweh, according to (Bietenhard, 1975:101) is virtually a hypostatic ap-

36 Francis (1963) argued in favour of a Mystical Jewish Ascent and interpreted

θρησκείᾳ τῶν ἀγγέλων (2:19) not in the objective genitive sense of the word (worship

directed to angels) but in the subjective genitive sense of the word (worship practiced

by the angels) with the implication that the believers participated with the angels in

the worship of God. In the monotheistic Jewish symbolic universe there is no room

for the worship of anything or anyone other than God. On the other side of the spec-

trum of this argument we find scholars like Lincoln (2000:566) who argue that the

false teachers urged the believers to placate the spiritual powers and in doing so, may

succeed in invoking their assistance in special cases where they needed them. 37 See Bietenhard (1975:101-103) to which I am indebted for the excursus on angels

in the OT and from whom most of the information was drawn.


157

pearance of Yahweh, the personified help of God. The result is therefore that

one cannot always easily distinguish between the angel and Yahweh (cf. Ex.

14:19; Num. 22:22; Judg. 6:11-24; 2 Ki. 1:3ff).

2. In Later Judaism popular belief in angels increased (according to

Bietenhard, 1975:101-102) as seen with the Rabbis. On the other hand the

Sadducees did not believe in angels or life after death (cf. Acts 23:8). Angels

represented God's omnipresence and served as his messengers. They were

linked with the stars, elements, natural elements and powers (στοιχεῖα τοῦ

κόσμου), which the angels ruled as God's representatives (Bietenhard,

1975:102). Individuals even had a guardian angel and national guardians pro-

tected Israel (cf. Michael over Israel in Dan. 10:13, 21). There were also other

groups of angels like powers, dominions, thrones, lords, authorities and serv-

ing angels. In Ethiopian Enoch, for instance, the Angelogy was highly devel-

oped. In the Qumran community angels were part of the cosmic dualism ac-

cording to which God created two kingdoms (light and darkness) over which

is set a prince or an angel with their angelic beings who are also called princes

(cf. 1 QS 2:20; CD 5:18 1 QM 13:10) or spirits (1QS 3:18ff) (Bietenhard,

1975:102).

Angels in the New Testament (drawing on Bietenhard, 1975:103ff):

1. References to angels appear 175 times in die New Testament (51 in

Synoptics; 21 in Acts, 67 in Rev.). In general the NT takes over the view of

the OT regarding angels: They are representatives of the heavenly world and

also serve as God's messengers. The moment they appear, the transcendental

world breaks into the immanent world. Angels accompany Jesus, because it il-

lustrates God's presence with him (cf. Matt. 1:20; 2:13; 28:2, 5; Mark 1:13;

Luk. 1:19; 2:9, 13; 22:43; John 1:51; Acts 1:10, etc.). At his second coming

they will accompany him as well (Matt. 13:49; 2 Thess. 1:7). With regard to

the Christology, the NT affirms that Jesus is the Son of God and therefore he

stands indisputably above the angels (Mark 13:27; Heb. 1:4-14; Phil. 2:9ff)

(Bietenhard, 1975:103)

2. In the early church, in Acts for instance, the angels make known God's

will to the apostles (Acts 8:26; 10:3-8; 27:27f). In Paul, the Christology domi-

nates the role of angels (cf. Eph. 1:20f; Phil. 2:9ff.). Paul argues that the

commission given to him by Christ is superior to the word of an angel (cf.

Gal. 1:8) (Bietenhard, 1975:103). In Col. 2:18, Paul attacks the false teachers

when it comes to the worship of angels due to the fact that it obscured the

community's view of the Christology (cf. also Col. 1:15ff; Rev. 19:10; 22:8).

According to Paul, angels were partakers in the giving of the Law (cf. Gal.

3:19; Acts 7:53; Heb. 2:2). In Revelation, God's angels mediate revelation,

give visions (cf. Rev. 1:1) and carry out God's judgments (Rev. 7:1) (cf. also

Matt. 25:41; 2 Cor. 12:7).

I am of the opinion (c.f. also Kümmel, 1975:338) that the θρησκείᾳ

τῶν ἀγγέλων in Colossians should be understood in the objective geni-

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

158

tive sense of the word, namely that the false teachers demanded the

veneration of angels38 and that it is to be linked with the στοιχεῖα τοῦ

κόσμου (elemental spirits of the world)39 of 2:8, those spirit beings,

who they believed had power over humankind. The false teachers

furthermore demanded the strict, ascetic observance of feasts, new

moon and Sabbath (2:16) as well as some dietary prescriptions (2:16,

21) that serves to mortify the body (2:23) and prepare a person for

direct encounter with the angelic powers that is fulfilled in revelatory

visions (cf. 2:18) (Kümmel, 1975:338).40 This view is confirmed by

the commentary by Early Church fathers. The early church father Ori-

gen,41 in his commentary on Colossians 2:18 said that:

38 See Stuckenbruck (1995) for a thorough discussion on angel veneration and Chris-

tology. 39 Cf. also Gal. 4:3. 40 See Thompson (2005:62-63) for a discussion of Apuleius in Metamorphoses where-

in the adventures of Lucius is told. Because of greed, Lucius is turned into an ass but

eventually transformed or restored into human form. In chapter 11 of the book Lucius

is initiated into the cult of Isis in Asia Minor which happens to be the area in which

Colossians were written as well. In order to prepare for the initiation, Lucius had to

fast, abstain from certain foods and drinks, he had to undergo ritual washing and had

to purchase new garments. Lucius experienced spiritual ecstasy. Sometime after, he

realized that he had not ‘arrived’ and had to undergo yet another process of initiation

into the cult of Osiris, the ‘highest father of the gods’ (cf. chapter 11:27). Soon after,

he discovered that he still had to undergo a third initiation process. Through each

successive initiation process, Lucius received greater spiritual enlightenment (cf.

chapter 11:29) (Thompson, 2005:63). The latter illustrates the possibility that the

Colossians in Asia Minor might have been aware of these religious practices and the

progressive spiritual enlightenment that allegedly took place. In Jewish thoughts of

the day this was also seen, for instance in Philo who referred to Moses’ journey to

perfection and his subsequent initiation into ‘divine mysteries’ (cf. Philo, Life of

Moses 1.158, referred to by Thompson, 2005:63). In Colossians we seem to have a

fusion of pagan and Jewish elements. The Jewish elements are seen in the reference to

the ‘festivals’, ‘new moons’ and ‘Sabbaths’ (cf. 1 Chr. 23:31; Hos. 2:11; Ezek. 45:17;

Epistle of Aristeas 142). According to Thompson (2005:64): ‘The “Colossian heresy”

may be an inadvertent blend of Jewish and laws with similar religious practices famil-

iar to the Colossians from their pagan past’. 41 Origen (Ὠριγένης [185–254]) was an important early Christian scholar and theolo-

gian, and certainly one of the most distinguished of the time. According to tradition,

he is held to have been an Egyptian who taught in Alexandria, reviving the Catecheti-

cal School of Alexandria where Clement of Alexandria had taught.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Christianity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Egypt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catechetical_School_of_Alexandria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catechetical_School_of_Alexandria

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria


159

και ου κατα Χριστόν κατα τα στοιχεια τοθ κόσμου

“[Y]ou will find for instance in Jeremiah (cf. Jer. 51:17; 7:17-18;

19:13) that the word of God through the prophets finds fault with Israel

because they worship angels and sacrifice to the queen of heaven and

all the host of heaven… Paul who received a meticulous education in

Jewish doctrines and later became a Christian as a result of a miracu-

lous appearance of Jesus, says these words” (Against Celcus 5.8; [OAC

269-270]).

The implication of the above is that Origen interpreted Colossians

2:18 as the ‘worship of angels’.42 It seems that this was a problem not

only by the time Colossians was written, but many centuries later also.

This is most clearly seen in the 35th Canon of the Council of Laodicea

(circa 360 AD) where the worship of angels was declared to be idola-

try.

The basic problem with this form of worship is that one is either

worshipping Christ, or not. There can be no mediatory process, for the

one by implication excludes the other (2:8) in a high Christology con-

text,43 and therefore Paul rejects the ritual demands of the false teach-

ers.

Wischmeyer (1999:1281) is therefore correct in remarking: ’Der

Rekurs auf Engel macht Gottes Handeln anschaulich und erzählbar.

Theologisch sind die Engel durch den Geist ersetzt. Soteriologisch

haben sie neben Christus keine Bedeutung’.

Although no agreement has been achieved concerning the nature of

this φιλοσοφία (cf. 2:8) or teaching, it appears that we have here a

42 Aristides also notes similar problems where it was believed that the Jews worshiped

the angels: ‘The barbarians have worshipped as gods the elements and famous men

(iii-vii). The Greeks have created gods who were slaves to passion. The Jews have

certainly known the true God, but they have worshipped Him in a childlike way and

have worshipped the Angels more than Him (xiv). The Christians alone know Him

and serve Him with a pure conscience by leading a life worthy of Him (xv-xvi)’

(Source: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tixeront/section1-2.html#aristides.

Accessed 13 January 2012. 43 See Witherington & Wessels (2006:306-308).

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tixeront/section1-2.html#aristides

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

160

teaching that does not seem to be within traditional Judaism,44 but

rather ‘a Phrygian development in which a local variety of Judaism

had been fused with a Philosophy of non-Jewish origin…’45 (Bruce,

1977:413).46 It might thus be possible that the synagogues in Phrygia

might have been exposed to the influences of Hellenistic speculation

that eventually led to some form of syncretism (O'Brien,

1982:xxxiii).47 According to Carr (1981:8) it is notable that in the

times of the Maccabean wars, it was the extremely pious who were

those who reacted the strongest against any syncretism, but the same

does not apply to the majority. Especially the ordinary people (to

whom Paul ministered) were not at all noted for their resistance

against foreign ideas, therefore syncretism in the complex religious

and social background of Asia-Minor could have been greater than we

44 O'Brien (1982:xxxiii) argues: ‘In the Colossian false teaching a special place was

apparently given to angels, as agents in creation and in the giving of the law’. One

form of belief in angelic agency in creation appears in Philo (cf. H. Chadwick, 1965-

66:286-307, especially 303), another in Justin Martyr. The latter referred to certain

Jewish teachers who took the words ‘let us make man’ (Gen 1:26) and ‘as one of us’

(Gen 3:22) to indicate, ‘God spoke to angels, or that the human frame was the work-

manship of angels’ (Justin, Dialogue 62; cf. Bruce, 1977:413). The angelic agency in

the giving of the law is mentioned by Paul in Galatians 3:19, as well as in Acts 7:53

and Hebrews 2:2, and it is attested in contemporary Jewish literature (cf. the earlier

Jub. 1:29 as well as the Mekilta on Ex. 20:18; Sifre on Num. 12:5; and Pesiqta Rab-

bati 21). 45 Schweizer (1982:14) notes that, according to Cicero, after Antiochus III had estab-

lished Jewish communities in this area there were more than 10 000 Jews in the area

(cf. Pro Flacco 28=Or. VI/2, 224f). 46 See Arnold (1995) for a more recent contribution where he argues that the Colos-

sian syncretism has to do with the interface between Christianity and folk belief at

Colossae. According to him the worship of angels has nothing to do with Jewish

mysticism by comparing it with magical papyri and inscriptions from Asia Minor.

Suffice to say that although there exists different theories, most with convincing

argumentation, most of them are of the opinion that the philosophy of the false teach-

ers certainly included the idea that Christ's power had to supplemented by certain

other spiritual powers (See Witherington & Wessels, 2006:306, footnote 420). 47 Some argue that we have here a syncretistic Jewish-Christian Mystical Asceticism

heresy (Francis, 1963; see O'Brien, 1982:xxxviii; see also Lightfoot, 1970:74; Küm-

mel, 1975:339-340).


161

tend to think.48 The interesting thing to note is that Paul, in his corre-

spondence with the Colossian community, entered upon a Christian

tradition that was already advanced in its process of formulation (see

Carr, 1981:8).

Clearly, as we see in Colossians 2:18, angels played an important

role in the philosophy and it seems that they were to be mollified by

means of the strict ascetic (cf. 2:21) observance of certain rules and

behaviours.49 O'Brien (1982:xxxiii) gives a good representation of the

basic problem:

In the Colossian false teaching these angels were to be placated by

keeping strict legal observances. The breaking of the law incurred

their displeasure and brought the lawbreaker into debt and bondage to

them (cf. Col. 2:12–15). These angels are included among the

στοιχεῖα (a term already used with reference to angels at Gal. 4:3, 9),

and were ‘not only elemental beings but dominant ones as well—

principalities and powers, lords of the planetary spheres, sharers in the

divine plenitude (πλήρωμα) and intermediaries between heaven and

earth’ (Bruce, 1977:414). Apparently they were thought to control the

lines of communication between God and man. All this was presented

as a form of advanced teaching for a spiritual elite. Epaphras had in-

structed the Colossian Christians only in the first steps and they were

now being urged to press on in wisdom and knowledge to attain to

true ‘fullness’ (πλήρωμα). To do this they must follow a path of rigor-

ous asceticism until finally they become citizens of that spiritual

world, the realm of light.

48 For perspectives on early Christian identity construction from a Dialogical Self

Theoretical (DST) view, see Kok (2014) and Kok & Roth (2014). According to DST

the identity of a person is not fixed, but changes over time and space. A person can

also have several different I-positions that might stand in direct conflict with each

other. This might also have been the case in early Christianity as the identity of

Christ-followers was constructed over time. This would have implicated different

(syncretistic) self-positions that might have stood in conflict with each other. 49 See Lincoln (2000:553-669). Herrmann (1999:1288) points to the fact that in later

Judaism and rabbinical literature, and in die world of magic, angels were ‘manipulat-

ed’ to do services to men: ‘In der Welt der Magie werden E. mit Hilfe magischer

Praktiken für sehr verschiedene Zwecke dienstbar gemacht (magische Bücher wie

Sefer ha-Razim, Amulette, Zauberschalen, Talismane)’.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

162

It thus seems in order to assume, that there existed a particular ethos

with regards to the φιλοσοφία of the false teachers and the worship-

ping of the angels as seen in the strict ascetic observances of rules.

Here, in following Wolter (2006:200-201), I distinguish between Iden-

tity, Ethics and Ethos (see Van der Watt, 2006:v-ix). Ethos is to be

understood as the concrete way of life or behaviour of a group (institu-

tionalized practices [cf. Wolter 2006:200]), based on the particular

ethics of that group, which is to be understood as the rules that govern

the community, which in its turn is based on their understanding of

themselves, God and others (identity). Wolter (2006:200-201) con-

vincingly argues that the ethos of a group consists of a mixture of

inclusive and exclusive practices.50 The exclusive practices distin-

guishes the group from outsiders and builds identity to the inside,

whereas the inclusive practices of the group are shared with the rest of

society and serves as a mechanism of integration into society. There-

fore it was initially possible for the false teachers to co-exist as ‘au-

thentic Christ-followers’ together with the faith community of Colos-

sae, to such an extent that they even succeeded in influencing them by

appearing to be humble (ταπεινοφροσύνῃ 2:18, 23) and wise (σοφίας

2:23), taking part in the worshipping of angels. The false teachers

even succeeded in forming a group that established themselves by

means of a shared symbolic universe that went as far as to condemn

(cf. κρινέτω in 2:16) those who did not share their particular view of

reality. In the language of group dynamics51 they were in the process

of forming, norming, and storming, on their way to creating a move-

ment, a movement that had the potential to threaten the identity, ethics

and ethos of the faith community at Colossae. For this reason an inter-

vention-strategy was needed, which inter alia took the form of Paul’s

Letter to the Colossians which had as its purpose the combating of

false doctrines within the church.

50 To my opinion, this distinction helps us to understand that the ethos of the Colos-

sian false teachers might have represented some continuity or familiarity with the

Jewish practices (cf. the prescriptions of the Jewish calendar; dietary regulations

[2:21], etc.) as well as Hellenistic practices and beliefs where it becomes possible that

Christianity could be syncretised with other philosophies. 51 See Tuckman (1965:384-399); Forsyth (1999:155).


163

The relationship between angelogy and Christology Clearly the philosophy of the false teachers endangered the identity of

the Colossian Christians, and the Letter as intervention strategy, aimed

at recalibrating the system and encouraging the community to stay on

or return to the right path (2:2 - ἵνα παρακληθῶσιν αἱ καρδίαι αὐτῶν).

Not surprisingly, the author of the Letter establishes the Christology

(1:15-20) and builds his argument on the latter, putting the powers and

principalities in their proper place (2:15) and in the process help the

Colossians to understand their own identity (2:6-15 etc.).

The Colossians, the Letter states, were those who have received

Christ Jesus as Lord and should stay in him alone: Ὡς οὖν παρελάβετε

τὸν Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν τὸν κύριον, ἐν αὐτῷ περιπατεῖτε (2:6).52 With the

ἐν αὐτῷ construction the author argues that the Colossian believers

have received a new identity that entails a discontinuity with the old

order. Christ must take a dominant position within the self-

understanding of a person. The external (Christ) must become part of

the internal, to use the language of Dialogical Self theory (Kok, 2014;

Kok & Roth, 2014). Christ must become the dominant, significant

other, who should serve as/in the promoter position guiding and shap-

ing the believer’s self-understanding.53 The writer clearly puts the

transformation of the believer against a dualistic, contrasting back-

ground. The writer utilizes the strong religious metaphors of light and

darkness to argue that the believers have been rescued (ἐρρύσατο)

from the authority (ἐξουσίας) and grip of darkness (σκότους) by being

transferred into the kingdom (μετέστησεν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν) of the

light (cf. 2:12-13). Once (ποτε) upon a time they were estranged and

alienated (ἀπηλλοτριωμένους) enemies of God (2:21) who were hos-

tile towards him in thought and deed (ἐχθροὺς τῇ διανοίᾳ ἐν τοῖς

ἔργοις τοῖς πονηροῖς), but now (νυνὶ) they are completely reconciled

(ἀποκατήλλαξεν) with God, restored to a new life, full of new possi-

bilities. Existentially, they have died with Christ; they are dead for sin

and have been buried with Christ but have radically been restored to

52 See 1:28, 2:11, 4:7 where the ἐν + dative construction is used to describe the ‘in

him’ concept. 53 For more information on DST and the function of a promoter position in the identi-

ty of a person, consult Hermans & Gieser (2012).

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

164

new life by being resurrected with Christ (2:11-12). For this very rea-

son, being newly born in a sense, being given a new paradigm for life,

they are not to submit to any of the old order paradigms of the past (cf.

Witherington & Wessels, 2006:305). From a Dialogical Self Theoreti-

cal point of view,54 the believers should not give room to ‘old voices’

and discourses that take them away from their new identity in Christ.

Christ must be the dominant voice shaping their identity. Their minds

should therefore be directed to those things that are from above (3:1)

oriented primarily towards Christ where he sits at the right hand of

God, and not towards angels (2:9) and the philosophy of men (2:8).

They have indeed been συνηγέρθητε τῷ Χριστῷ (raised together with

Christ [3:1]) – raised to a higher level of being. The Christian's identi-

ty, ethics and ethos is in other words inextricably bound to the identity

of Christ (Witherington & Wessels, 2006:305; see Lincoln, 2000:574).

It is exactly here that the high Christology of Colossians comes in-

to play and where the relation between the Angelology, the powers

and spirits (cf. στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου) and the Christology are set

against a particular relief. According to Lohse (1986:178), the author

of Colossians develops his Christology on the basis of the Christ

hymn in 1:15-20 and draws the conclusions that follow from this par-

ticular confession. In Colossians, Christ is the firstborn of creation

(πρωτότοκος πάσης κτίσεως [1:15]), the reconciliatory redeemer of

the world and the head of the church55 (Kümmel, 1975:336). In him

everything that exists were created.

54 See Hermans & Gieser (2012) for an overview of Dialogical Self Theory (DST).

For a discussion of DST as a heuristic tool in New Testament Studies and the under-

standing of early Christian identity construction, see Kok & Roth (2014) and Kok

(2014). According to DST, the self is not monolithic but polyphonic. For that reason

the self is made up of several self-positions. Sometimes these self-positions can stand

in conflict with each other, for instance when myself as Christian and myself as sol-

dier are in direct conflict. Often it is though that early Christians ‘converted’ from one

paradigm to another making a ‘clean break’ so to speak (see Kok & Roth, 2014:1-10).

DST shows us that this is not always the way identity is constructed and how conver-

sion happens. Some elements of the past are still in a dialogical way part of the poly-

phonic self. This seems to have been the case in Colossians as well. 55 The ecclesiology of Colossians is intimately connected with its Christology. Christ

is Lord over all, but the exalted Lord not only exercises his rule over the whole world,

but also over his body, the church of who he is the head (Lohse, 1986:179). Cf. Pseu-


165

In 2:15, Christ's triumph in the crucifixion over the cosmic princi-

palities (ἀρχὰς) and powers (ἐξουσίας) is accentuated with the use of

the θριαμβεύσας metaphor,56 in which they are presented as being

stripped (ἀπεκδυσάμενος) from their power and put on public display,

exposed (ἐδειγμάτισεν) to ridicule in the triumphal procession of

Christ.57 As Lohse (1986:112) rightly remarks: ‘As their devastating

defeat is shown to the whole world, the infinite superiority of Christ is

demonstrated’. Therefore, it could be argued that the exalted Christ is

head over all powers and principalities (2:10), Lord over everything

that exists (1:27). The Christology of Colossians goes well beyond the

limits of the so-called authentic Pauline letters (cf. Phil. 2:9-11; 1 Cor.

8:6; Rom. 8:31-39, etc.)58 by claiming that in Christ the complete full-

ness of the deity dwells bodily (cf. 2:9 - ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ

πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς). Not only had death and sin been

conquered, but this victory has been achieved by God himself (With-

erington & Wessels, 2006:307). In Christ as the head over all powers

and principalities, we share in his fullness (2:10 - ἐν αὐτῷ

πεπληρωμένοι, ὅς ἐστιν ἡ κεφαλὴ πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας).

Logically speaking from the latter Christological perspective, we

can infer that any form of worshipping of angels would entail the

wrong understanding of their identity, as well as the Christology.

do-Clementine, The recognitions of Clement, Book II, Chapter XlII regarding Guardi-

an angels: ‘But Christ is God of princes, who is Judge of all. Therefore neither an-

gels, nor men, nor any creature, can be truly gods, forasmuch as they are placed under

authority, being created and changeable: angels, for they were not, and are; men, for

they are mortal; and every creature, for it is capable of dissolution, if only He dissolve

it who made it. And therefore He alone is the true God, who not only Himself lives,

but also bestows life upon others, which He can also take away when it pleaseth Him’.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.iv.xlii.html. Accessed 18 June 2013. 56 According to Kittel, Bromiley & Friedrich (1976.2:31), in the ancient world,

θριαμβεύσας had to do with the public display of the vanquished forces before the

cosmos, possibly in a triumphal procession, after a battle has been won. The victori-

ous king or emperor would put the vanquished forces and their leader on public dis-

play for the whole world to see. 57 See Witherington & Wessels (2006:307). 58 O'Brien (1982:xlv) remarks that: ‘The emphatic cosmic dimension of Christ's rule is

a fuller and more systematic exposition of the theme of Christ's universal Lordship,

already made plain in earlier Pauline letters (cf. 1 Cor. 8:6; 1:24; 2:6-10) and now

spelled out in relation to and as a correction of the false teaching at Colossae’.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.iv.xlii.html

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

166

When those who share the fullness of Christ (2:10) worship angels

(2:18), they categorically speaking do not only degrade themselves by

becoming subject to ordinances (2:20), but also degrade Christ and

reject the fullness of the reconciliatory (1:20) work of Christ. By wor-

shipping angels, they do not understand the full implication of the

fullness given to them, for they have access to the fullness of God

through Christ alone. Witherington & Wessels (2006:307) remarks:

[T]hrough Christ they have power over all the powers and authority,

both political and spiritual. There is no need to fear these powers.

There is no need, therefore, to consider placating strategies by not eat-

ing this or that, or any need for them as Gentiles to observe Jewish re-

ligious festivals. There is no need to be intimidated into a category of

second class Christians if they would not participate in certain reli-

gious rites. Paul's exhortation to the Colossians believers not to be be-

holden to mystical journeys to heaven, brought about by ascetism and

ritualistic observances, is rooted in his re-defining of their identity…

Because of the fact that the believers have full access to God, there is

no need for them to placate the spiritual powers by mystical or ascetic

or any other means for that matter. From a Dialogical Self point of

view, the latter would amount to internalizing the angels and the pow-

ers in such a way that the internal dialogue between God, Jesus and

believers are distorted. In the identity of the believer, God and Christ

must be the dominant voices influencing behavior and not inferior

principalities and forces. All these possible means to gain access or

special revelation are redundant because the believers have been

granted the fullness of God and there is no need to compensate or look

for anything more than what has already been given. Wischmeyer

(1999:1281) goes so far as to argue: ‘Im Joh. und pln. [Pauline]

Briefen machen die Endgültigkeit der Offenbarung Gottes in Jesus

Christus und die Gegenwart des Geistes jede Rede von E. [Angels] als

Helfern und Boten Gottes überflüssig’.


167

Conclusion As argued above, the philosophy (2:8) of the false teachers endan-

gered the identity of the Colossian Christians, and the Letter as inter-

vention strategy was written to recalibrate the system and encourage

the community (2:2) to understand their true identity in Christ. Paul

felt the need to rebut the error that lay at the heart of this strange aber-

ration of the apostolic kerygma (O'Brien, 1982:xxx). The author did

this by establishing the Christology (1:15-20) and then developed his

argument on the basis of the latter, putting the powers and principali-

ties in proper perspective (2:15) and helped the Colossians to under-

stand their own identity (2:6-15 etc.) and the primacy of Christ as

fullness of God as primary promoter59 position or ‘voice’ to be taken

seriously by believers.

By writing the Letter, the author in my opinion succeeded in set-

ting the problem of the false teachings in the community within a par-

ticular framework, presenting the high Christology of Colossians,

which not only decreased the status of the principalities and powers,

but also the false teachers and in the process also reestablished and

reaffirmed the true identity of the Christ-followers. This Letter could

thus have played a significant role in the continuing construction of

the communities’ identity, ethics and ethos, strengthening and equip-

ping them in combating false teachings that threatened the health of

the faith community in Colossae.

Bibliography Arnold, C.E. 1995. The Colossian Syncretism: The Interface between

Christianity and Folk Belief at Colossae. WUNT 77. Tübingen:

Mohr Siebeck.

Barclay, J.M.G. 1997. Colossians and Philemon. Sheffield: Sheffield

University Press.

59 According to Dialogical Self Theory, the self is made up of several self-positions,

but the self also has certain dominant voices that help the self to integrate the different

self-positions. Significant others, real or imagined, serve such a role (Hermans &

Gieser, 2012:14-20). In the Christian religion Christ is such a figure or promoter

position.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

168

Bietenhard, H. 1975. ‘Angel’, in Brown, C. Dictionary of New Testa-

ment Theology, 101-103. 1. Exeter: Paternoster.

Bruce, F.F. 1977. Paul: Apostle of the Free Spirit. Exeter: Paternoster.

Carr, W. 1981. Angels and Principalities. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Dibelius, M. 1909. Die Geisteswelt im Glauben des Paulus. Wien:

C.Kaiser.

Everling, O. 1888. Die Paulinische Angelologie und Dämonologie:

Ein Biblisch-theologische Versuch. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck &

Ruprecht.

Forsyth, D.R. 1999. Group Dynamics. California: Wadsworth.

Francis, F.O. 1963. ‘Humility and Angelic Worship in Col. 2:18’.

StTh 16:109–134.

-. 1975. ‘Humility and Angelic Worship in Col. 2:18’, in Francis, F.O.

& Meeks, W.A. (eds.) Conflict at Colossae, 163-195. Second edi-

tion. SBLSBS 4. Missoula: Scholars.

Guthrie, D. 1976. New Testament Introduction. Leicester: IVP.

Hermans, H.J & Gieser, T. 2012, Handbook of Dialogical Self Theory.

Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Herrmann, K. 1999. ‘Engel. Judentum’, in Persch, J. (ed.) Religion in

Geschichte und Gegenwart, 1288-1289. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Holtzmann, H.J. 1872. Kritik der Epheser und Kolosserbriefe: auf

Grund einer Analyse ihres Verwandtschaftsverhältnisses. Leipzig:

W. Engelmann.

Hooker, M.D. 1973. ‘Were there False Teachers in Colossae?’, in

Lindars, B. & Smalley, S.S. (eds.) Christ and Spirit in the New

Testament. Studies in Honour of Charles Francis Digby Moule.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kittel, G., Bromiley G.W. & Friedrich, G. (eds.) 1976. Theological

Dictionary of the New Testament. 1964-c1976, 5-9. Friedrich, G.

(ed.). 10 compiled by R. Pitkin. Grand Rapids, Mi: Eerdmans.

Kok, J. 2010. ‘Die Irrglaube in Kolosse: Aanbidding van of met

Engele in Kolossense 2:18?’. HvTSt 66(1), Art. #765, 7 pages.

DOI: 10.4102/hts.v66i1.765.

Kok, J. & Roth, D.T. 2014. ‘Sensitivity towards Outsiders and the

dynamic relationship between mission and ethics/ethos: An intro-

duction’, in Kok, J., Nicklas, T., Roth, D.T. & Hays, C.M. (eds.)


169

Sensitivity towards Outsiders, 1-23. WUNT 2/364. Tübingen:

Mohr Siebeck.

Kok, J. 2014 (forthcoming). Dialogical Self-Theory as Heuristic Tool

in New Testament Studies. Pretoria: University of Pretoria.

Kümmel, W.G. 1975. Introduction to the New Testament. Heidelberg:

Quelle & Meyer.

Lightfoot, J.B. 1970. Saint Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to

Philemon. Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

Lincoln, A.T. 2000. Colossians in The New Interpreter's Bible, 11.

Nashville: Abingdon.

Lohse, E. 1986. Colossians and Philemon. Hermeneia. Philadelphia:

Fortress.

Mayerhoff, E.T. 1838. Der Brief an die Kolosser, mit Vornehmlicher

Berücksichtigung der Drei Pastoralbriefe Kritisch Geprüft. J.L.

Meyerhoff (ed.). Berlin: Hermann Schultze.

O'Brien, P.T. 1982. Colossians, Philemon. Word Biblical Commen-

tary. 44. Texas: Word.

Osborne, G.R. 2008. ‘Literary Theory and Biblical Interpretation’, in

Firth, D.G. & Grant, J.A. (eds.) Words in the Word: Explorations

in Biblical Interpretation & Literary Theory, 17-50. Illinois: IVP

Academic.

Percy, E. 1946. Die Probleme der Kolosser- und Epheserbriefe. Lund:

C.W.K. Gleerup.

Popper, K. 1994. All Life is Problem Solving. London: Routledge.

Schweizer, E. 1982. Colossians. London: SPCK.

Shillington, G.V. 2008. The New Testament in Context. London: T&T

Clark.

Stuckenbruck, L.T. 1995. Angel Veneration and Christology. WUNT

II, 70. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Thompson, M.M. 2005. Colossians & Philemon. Two Horizons New

Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.

Tuckman, B.W. 1965. Developmental sequences in small groups.

Psychological Bulletin, 63:383-399.

Van der Watt, J.G. (ed.) 2006. Identity, Ethics and Ethos in the New

Testament. Berlin: De Gruyter.

JACOBUS (KOBUS) KOK

170

Van Eck, E. 2008. The Deutero Pauline Literature. Unpublished Lec-

ture Notes. Department of New Testament Studies, University of

Pretoria.

Wischmeyer, O. 1999. ‘Engel (im) Neues Testament’, in Persch, J

(ed.) Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 1280-1281. Tübing-

en: Mohr Siebeck.

Witherington, B. & Wessels, F.G. 2006. ‘Ethics and Ethos in Colos-

sians’, in Van der Watt, J.G. (ed.) Identity, Ethics and Ethos in the

New Testament, 199-217. Berlin: De Gruyter.

Wolter, M. 2006. ‘Pauline ethics according to 1 Corinthians’, in Van

der Watt, J.G. (ed.) Identity, Ethics and Ethos in the New Testa-

ment, 199-217. Berlin: De Gruyter.

christology in the making worshiping ofwith angels in colossians.pdf

Documents

new testament studies

new testament research

new testament

suited abe

new testaments soci

van rensburg editors

biblical studies

academic life